New Research on the Voynich Manuscript: Proceedings of a Seminar (Foia Reading Room)

The Voynich manuscript is famous among enthusiasts of arcana, rare books, and cryptography. It is a 200+ page color rare book written in a cipher that has resisted decryption to this day. It is named after a Polish rare book dealer who surfaced the manuscript in 1912. Its history and provenance are uncertain. Many people have been proposed as possible authors, among them Roger Bacon, John Dee or Edward Kelley, Giovanni Fontana, and Voynich.

This 80-page book contains the proceedings of a one-day seminar on the Voynich manuscript, held in Washington, DC on 30 November 1976, notable for the prominence of personnel of the National Security Agency, which was at the time even more deeply shrouded in secrecy than it remains today.

The contents include:

• General Introduction. Very Filby, Sponsor.
• Introductory Remarks. M.E. D'Imperio, Moderator.
• A Linguistic Approach to the Voynich Text. James Child.
• Some Important New Statistical Findings. Capt. Prescott Currier.
• Suggestions Toward a Decipherment of the "Key". Dr. Sydney Fairbanks.
• The Solution Claim of Dr. Robert S. Brumbaugh. M. E. D'Imperio.
• Further Details of New Statistical Findings. Capt. Prescott Currier.
• Questions and Discussion.
• Appendix A. The Voynich Manuscript, Some Notes and Observations. Capt. Prescott Currier.
• Appendix B. What Constitutes Proof? Stuart H. Buck.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requires that each federal agency maintain an electronic Reading Room with most frequently requested documents. The FOIA Reading Room series presents selected items from each agency's Reading Room, in this case, the National Security Agency, whose many cryptographers have maintained an interest in the Voynich manuscript for many decades.

Readers who enjoy works like THE DA VINCI CODE, PUZZLE PALACE, and SNOWDEN will find this an appealing purchase. Why was the NSA deeply interested in the Voynich manuscript in 1976? What were they thinking? There is no substitute for looking at primary documents and real-time work product to understand how people's minds were actually working in history.